Is it not fair and reasonable to argue that a management team proposing (less than) half a solution to (less than) half the problem they are charged with addressing is taking a somewhat halfwitted approach to its core duty?
Mr Cousins and Ms O'Shannahy are now President and CEO of the Australian Conservation Foundation.
Isn't it about time that the ACF Management start to address an issue that should concern them, which is population growth management? With global population growth of around 80 million per annum this issue is as important as climate change. Australia does not use population growth for any humanitarian or sustainable development purpose. Instead it uses population to drive emissions growth, mistakenly chase profits that don't exist and commit crimes against humanity and the environment as a direct result of economic mismanagement and confused priorities. The ACF fully supports this with population growth denial (The Naked Emperor Syndrome). Where is the due diligence to support this?
2014-15: Migration program set at 190,000 places; humanitarian intake 13,750 places.
SOURCES: Department of Immigration; Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Refugees, migration and population growth management are related, but completely different, issues. These are global issues and each must be addressed separately in each country. Australia cannot continue to practice population growth extremism, combined with population growth denial, for fear of accusations of being anti-refugee or anti-migration. Concealment promotes misunderstanding. Legitimate conduct promotes debate and development of ethical outcomes.
The Government's abuse of population growth management objectives by using extreme population growth as an economic tool is primarily driven by a belief that it is essential for economic wellbeing and employment. Economic statistics support an opposite conclusion. The irony is that the mass migration of relatively wealthy people decreases the capacity for refugee intake. Just as the environment has finite capacity for population growth, so does the economy. This reduces the capacity for philanthropic domestic and foreign aid.
Geoffrey Cousins spent a significant part of his career working for large utility companies. These organisations rely on population growth to grow their businesses. Some, like Telstra and Optus, directly produce relatively few emissions. Others, like coal fired power generators and oil & gas producers produce far more. I assume that Geoffrey Cousins eats meat and drives a car. If he didn't do this he would, no doubt, produce less carbon emissions. If he didn't exist at all he would produce no carbon emissions. Carbon footprints cannot be completely eliminated. The number of feet must be limited. Trend population growth predicts Melbourne will have 593 million people in 200 years. I have a size 11 shoe. With 4.25 million now would my shoe size need to reduce to (4.25/593) x 11 = size 0.08 to fit into Melbourne in 2215?
For Australia and the ACF to deny responsibility for campaigning for population growth management in conjunction with renewable energy is a dishonest and halfwitted approach to responsible conservation governance.
Demand
This is proportional to the number of people demanding something. The global economy since 1900 has been driven by a perverse combination of population growth supported by technological development and environmental destruction.
Supply
Supplying people with what they want includes supplying them with energy. Renewable energy produces very few emissions during its lifecycle and fossil fuel based energy does.
Add comment